| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 2479 2012 SLD 2479 2012 YLR 1976 |
Lahore High Court
Revision No. 368 and Murder Reference No. 718 of 2006, heardon 19th April, 2011
SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD AND SARDAR MUHAMMAD SHAMIM KHAN, JJ
Muhammad Naveed Rana for Appellants. Munir Ahmad Khan Sial, D.P.G. the State. Mahr Habib Ullah Garwah for the Complainant
Revision No. 368 and Murder Reference No. 718 of 2006, heardon 19th April, 2011
SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD AND SARDAR MUHAMMAD SHAMIM KHAN, JJ
Muhammad Naveed Rana for Appellants. Munir Ahmad Khan Sial, D.P.G. the State. Mahr Habib Ullah Garwah for the Complainant
YOUSAF MASIH alias GAPI and anotherVsTHE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)/34---Qatl-e-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Promptly lodged F.I.R. had excluded the chances of deliberations and consultations---Names of accused, manner of occurrence, seats of injuries, weapons of offence and names of witnesses had been mentioned by the complainant in the F.I.R.---Motive had been proved against the accused---Ocular testimony was unanimous on all material points without any material contradictions or material improvements--- Eye-witnesses had identified the accused in the light of electric bulb---Non-taking of electric bulb into possession by police during investigation would not adversely affect the prosecution case---Eye-witnesses being not inimical towards accused, their close relationship with deceased was not a valid ground for discarding their testimony--Presence of eye-witnesses at the scene of occurrence was well-explained---Medical evidence had corroborated ocular account of occurrence---Blood-stained hatchet and "chhuri" recovered from the possession of accused having been found stained with human blood, had further corroborated the ocular version---Specific defence plea taken by accused of having committed the murder of the deceased under grave and sudden provocation, was highly improbable and unbelievable and ran counter to human nature---Even otherwise, accused had failed to prove his said specific plea as required under Art.121 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Conviction of both accused was maintained accordingly--- However, according to medical evidence there was no difference between the role of the two accused qua the injuries inflicted by them on the deceased, therefore death sentence awarded to one 'accused was reduced to imprisonment for life in circumstances---Sentence of imprisonment for life of other accused was maintained---Appeal was disposed of accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302/ 337-A(ii)/ 337-D---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Qatl-e-Amd---Appeal against acquittal---Appreciation of evidence--=No motive was attributed to accused---Accused was not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased---Only…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492